Zero tolerance of racism and hate crime in sport

[TheCat]

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > pk Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > So you think it?s different people booing

> > > different things for different reasons? And

> > that

> > > those booing moments later are shrewd and

> > informed

> > > political intellects rather than xenophobic

> or

> > > racist dickheads?

> > >

> > > How do you work that out?

> >

> >

> > This isnt a black and white issue (no pun

> > intended). You're trying to pigeonhole my broad

> > comments on booing in general to suggest im

> > specifically talking about one set of

> individuals

> > at one football match. Sure...some of the

> people

> > who have booed at one or many of the football

> > matches where booing took place probably have

> > racist views....but there are a great many

> people

> > out there who I would guess that wouldnt be

> > considered as racist who dont like taking the

> > knee. How do you explain the Millwall fans

> > 'turnaround' as discussed above....were the

> > racists just all busy with something else at

> the

> > time of the second match?

> >

> > Seph, I think this whole phrasing of the

> 'marxist'

> > nature of BLM having driven the booing is a bit

> of

> > a strawman made to mock non-political people

> who

> > dont like BLM. Lets be real for a second...of

> > course most people out there dont consider the

> > 'marxist' nature of BLM and object to them on a

> > academic/political science level....but I

> expect

> > most people hear terms like 'defund the police'

> > etc and decide they dont like the sound of this

> > mob. Its not a wildly unreasonable thing to

> think,

> > even if you personally dont agree with it.

> >

> > Take for example the phrasing that PK has use

> > above as an exmaple of this strawman as I see

> > it....so people are either 'shrewd political

> > intellects' or 'racist d!ckheads'?....that's

> just

> > unnecessarily binary...the overwhelming

> majority

> > of people will be neither of those two things.

> >

> > I think for many progressive types, its worth

> > asking yourself 'why' people dont like BLM,

> rather

> > than simply insisting they must like it, and

> > concluding that if they dont then they must

> just

> > be racist. That's just far too easy.

>

>

> what a hypocrite you are

I dont know what you're talking about.

There's an actual civil discussion going on on this thread (note sephiroth and I obviously disagree on this issue, but can manage to discuss it civilly) - feel free to join in, if you like.

But, if you just want to come on here to troll and abuse me, probably best if you just f#ck off instead.

[pk]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I dont know what you're talking about.

if you promise to listen, i'll explain when i've got time but, in short, i think you're too happy to talk about things that you really don't understand - like the undesirable elements that are very vocally present amongst football fans (and have been for decades before BLM) and critical race theory, and to make sweeping inaccurate generalisations about those that you don't agree with by totally misrepresenting what the majority believe

>

> There's an actual civil discussion going on on

> this thread (note sephiroth and I obviously

> disagree on this issue, but can manage to discuss

> it civilly) - feel free to join in, if you like.

>

> But, if you just want to come on here to troll and

> abuse me, probably best if you just f#ck off

> instead.

great way to be civil, i must learn to tell you to f off more (to be civil, obvs)

[TheCat]

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > I dont know what you're talking about.

>

> if you promise to listen, i'll explain when i've

> got time

I look forward to it.

[Sephiroth]

? SO I do suspect its a wider problem with BLM..?

I?m not sure where any white personal would get the confidence to say that tbh

If problems develop from people taking the knee we can talk about it. But for now it?s black sportsmen and their allies showing solidarity and some white people telling them what isn?t and isn?t acceptable. Which would make me runs million miles

I mean for decades before BLM we have had black players telling us about their racist treatment from the stands - and I?m inclined to think those abusers are the ones booing (whilst relying on ?non racist? booers to provide cover and respectability)

[TheCat]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ? SO I do suspect its a wider problem with BLM..?

>

> I?m not sure where any white personal would get

> the confidence to say that tbh

I dont understand why the colour of my skin determines whether Im allowed to suggest that some people might not like the BLM organisation or not? If im not allowed to say it..maybe YouGov is....this survey suggests sizeable minority have a negative view of BLM https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/not-for-profit/Black_Lives_Matter

Perhaps i've misunderstood your point.

>

> If problems develop from people taking the knee we

> can talk about it. But for now it?s black

> sportsmen and their allies showing solidarity and

> some white people telling them what isn?t and

> isn?t acceptable. Which would make me runs

> million miles

>

> I mean for decades before BLM we have had black

> players telling us about their racist treatment

> from the stands - and I?m inclined to think those

> abusers are the ones booing (whilst relying on

> ?non racist? booers to provide cover and

> respectability)

Sure. Dont really disagree. As i said above, of course 'some' of the booers will be the racist ones. And there will of course be some element of 'undesirables', which as PK has mentioned above more than pre-dates the past 12 months. But I come back to my broader point which is that I suspect than many people who dont like taking the knee (whether that happens inside or outside a football stadium) are taking issue with BLM specifically, as opposed being a genuine old fashioned racist.

Surely 29% of the population (as in the You Gov survey) are not racists? We've got bigger problems than booing at the football if thats the case!

Interestingly....not real difference between the views of teh english population in general and the english football fan population.....

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/581b3v3h1r/YouGov%20-%20Taking%20the%20Knee.pdf

[j.a.]

Anyone who genuinely thinks highly paid footballers are somehow closet Marxists has been taken in by the culture war f?ckers who are whipping up conflation of taking the knee with an extremist political view.

Sorry, but it?s clearly an anti-racist action. Marxism? Really? If someone wants believe that it?s because they *want to believe that.* It does not take much brain power to see that these guys are not trying to bring about defunding of the police and the abolition of property.

I thought that bit where Millwall fans booed those taking the knee one day and applauded linking arms and holding up a banner the next. Right, I see. So you can make an anti-racist gesture provided you do it in a manner that other people are comfortable with? Ok then. Let?s be sure to get the permission of a lot of white folks as to how they?re happy for black people to protest.

Taking the knee has f? all to do with Marxism, very little really to do with BLM, and is simply a way of people showing that they?ve frankly had enough of systemic and structural racism. Of which there is still a lot about.

[Sephiroth]

@cat

I dunno

I have no means of putting a number on what percentage of the country are racists. But that number you posted didn?t make me gasp and think ?not possible?

[malumbu]

Sorry for an off thread post. I liked it in the 1970s when many booed the national anthem at England matches. Nothing to do with racism, but that at the time there was a much greater support for a republic. Of course the national anthem is not the English National Anthem. Although it says nothing really about our UK - rather going on about monarchy and God (OK if you look closer there is also some derogatory lines about the Scots). I've covered both my views on our dirge of a National Anthem, and an appropriate song specifically for England in early threads. Notable also that at England football matches until Euro 96, fans would bring the Union flag, rather than the cross of St George.

Just humour me and don't respond to this post. Plenty more interesting ones to discuss above. Sorry for not joining in Cat, but I'll read your current debate in slower time later.

[j.a.]

There?s different levels of racism though. The out-and-out blatant racism that existed up to around the end of the 80?s has thankfully gone, as has the clear bigotry of many workplaces, but people still hold prejudices.

Near enough a third of the country having somewhat uncomfortable feelings towards non-whites? Yeah, I got no trouble believing it.

It comes down, I guess, to how you classify racism. And that?s generally quite a subjective view. It shouldn?t be but it is.

[Seabag]

Can Mark post on here (all of the EDF) more often please.

End of post.

[KidKruger]

Cat, I?d be surprised if the racist contingent in this country was as low as 29% !

[Nigello]

I think there are other forms of prejudice that are prevalent in football - the clubs, the players, the supporters. Could there be a way of using a gesture or a symbol or a minute's silence etc. that would act to say all forms of bigotry are not tolerated in the game? (I don't like football and so have no skin in the game but I do recognise that the beautiful game is not that attractive in a number of ways even though it is immensely popular and brings great joy to many.)

[j.a.]

It?s not really about racism in football specifically, or even in the wider sporting world. It?s a general anti-racist gesture.

I think the sentiment behind your suggestion is admirable, FWIW, football still has, for example, a problem with homophobia (can anyone name an out Premier League player? Statistically there?s got to be someone).

I?m not sure football is anywhere near being able to call itself tolerant. I suppose the argument is all that matters is what you do on the pitch, but it isn?t really the case.

[Blah Blah]

The thing being missed here is that taking the knee relates specifically to the murder, and yes it was a murder, of George Floyd by a police office. Now oddly enough, many of those that have an issue with players taking the knee, also think George Floyd was not murdered at all.

When those payers do that, as with the NFL player who was first to do it, they are thinking about that legacy of racism, that manifested itself in that murder. They are not thinking about marxism or any other such tripe. Those expressing faux outrage at that,are doing so for their own political, and in some cases, racist agenda. The onus is on them to understand the true intent, instead of being on players to pacify some pretty unsavory football fans.

[TheCat]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The thing being missed here is that taking the

> knee relates specifically to the murder, and yes

> it was a murder, of George Floyd by a police

> office. Now oddly enough, many of those that have

> an issue with players taking the knee, also think

> George Floyd was not murdered at all.

>

im sure pk will be right along in a minute to berate you for misrepresenting those you disagree with...

But while we wait.....the conflation of those two things is quite a statement.....is that based on any evidence you care to share?

IM quite sure that anyone who thinks he wasn't murdered probably also doesn't like the taking the knee.....but I'd very very surprised if the opposite is true.....

[JohnL]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cat, I?d be surprised if the racist contingent in

> this country was as low as 29% !

It's wrong of any government to use that for electoral gain - which is what seems to be happening

[Sephiroth]

Jesus, cat

What is it you think is controversial about blah?s statement? Your subsequent sentence seems to suggest you don?t think he was murdered? Is that right?

[TheCat]

KidKruger Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cat, I?d be surprised if the racist contingent in

> this country was as low as 29% !

im quite disheartened that you would think that...of course its subjective so is your preogative.

but....If we take out the ~15% of minority ethnic in the population (as I assume you think its only white people that are the peoblem), and then take out children under 10 (I know people are trying to raise anti-racist babies, but for the most part I would think young kids are okay)...so that makes the figure closer to 40%........so you think that 40% of the population are racists? God I hope not...i'd like to have a bit more faith in my neighbours....

[TheCat]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jesus, cat

>

> What is it you think is controversial about blah?s

> statement? Your subsequent sentence seems to

> suggest you don?t think he was murdered? Is that

> right?

what? no.

sorry if that not clear. of course he was murdered. Im referring to BLah's statement that most people who dont like taking the knee also beleive he wasnt murdered....I dont think anyone reasonable would think he wasnt murdered. But plenty of reasonable people dont agree with the knee for reasons previously discussed. It seems a very unlikely conflation of those two viewpoints.

[JohnL]

Has taking the knee been made compulsory in any setting or sport

If not then it's just a personal support gesture and surely those doing it know better than those not doing it why they do it (and I don't think it's to support Karl Marx).

[Sephiroth]

@CAT

Phew.... sorry if I misinterpreted then

On the claim about the booers - I don't think blah has it wrong - if you are one of the people who don't think he was murdered (and there is an internet rabbit hole best avoided) then you are likely to boo. If you are Rid Liddle you are likely to boo etc etc - before you know it you have a large contingent of booers who fit blah's description

[j.a.]

TheCat Wrote:

------------------------------------------------------

> im quite disheartened that you would think

> that...of course its subjective so is your

> preogative.

>

> but....If we take out the ~15% of minority ethnic

> in the population (as I assume you think its only

> white people that are the peoblem), and then take

> out children under 10 (I know people are trying to

> raise anti-racist babies, but for the most part I

> would think young kids are okay)...so that makes

> the figure closer to 40%........so you think that

> 40% of the population are racists? God I hope

> not...i'd like to have a bit more faith in my

> neighbours....

A couple of points for consideration.

Firstly, you - like the rest of us here - live in London. Metropolitan elitism wokey scum that we apparently are, in these kind of places we tend to have lower levels of racism than outside London, Manchester, Bristol etc etc. Step outside those parts of the world and things get?different. Your immediate neighbours probably aren?t racists, but it?s not hard to find parts of the UK where they still don?t like brown people. Feel free to disagree, but it?s naive to think otherwise.

Secondly, racism isn?t just (I know you know this but I?ll say it anyway) yelling abuse at people in the street. One of the things that infuriates me is the declaration by some people that racism is over just because no one chucks the n-word around any more (even though they do). Racism exists on many levels and in many ways. It?s insidious, one of the worst poisons in society. There?s a lot of people who would describe themselves as not racist, but still have opinions on how black people should carry themselves. Again, I point to Millwall fans showing how they?re ok with dictating how people should display anti-racist sentiments. Also, Meghan Markle, ?nuff said.

[TheCat]

j.a. Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

?nuff said.

hmmm...not really. You're presenting some of your viewpoints as very much fait accompli (i.e. there's plenty of people who dont agree that criticism of Meghan is racially motivated, Im one of them).

I said earlier in this thread that the core of the problem here on the taking the knee is that different people have different views about what it represents. You've made clear in your comments that for you its just an anti-racist gesture. For others it would seem that its not....or at least it means a little more than just that.

If people are free to have agency to decide how they want to protest/gesture, then other people are free to have agency to disagree with the form of protest without necessarily being branded as racist. No one, no matter what colour they are, has absolute say on how to deal with these issues.

[TheCat]

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> @CAT

>

> Phew.... sorry if I misinterpreted then

>

> On the claim about the booers - I don't think blah

> has it wrong - if you are one of the people who

> don't think he was murdered (and there is an

> internet rabbit hole best avoided) then you are

> likely to boo. If you are Rid Liddle you are

> likely to boo etc etc - before you know it you

> have a large contingent of booers who fit blah's

> description

yep...as I said....those who prob dont think he was murdered are likely booers. But I really dont feel the opposite is true....i.e. not liking the knee/BLM doesn't mean you dont think he was murdered....

[j.a.]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> j.a. Wrote

> hmmm...not really. You're presenting some of your

> viewpoints as very much fait accompli (i.e.

> there's plenty of people who dont agree that

> criticism of Meghan is racially motivated, Im one

> of them).

Then that?s something we fundamentally disagree about.

>

> I said earlier in this thread that the core of the

> problem here on the taking the knee is that

> different people have different views about what

> it represents. You've made clear in your comments

> that for you its just an anti-racist gesture.

?Just? an anti-racist gesture? While I?m very happy to debate, I object vociferously to passive-aggressive language like that.

For

> others it would seem that its not....or at least

> it means a little more than just that.

>

No. Again, this may be a fundamental disagreement. I believe, without reservation, that those who see it as os kind of political, Marxist statement are either

A) Racists using it as an excuse.

B) Being taken in by culture war folk who want to dilute the anti-racist nature

or C) Happy to believe it because it fits their personal narrative.

> If people are free to have agency to decide how

> they want to protest/gesture, then other people

> are free to have agency to disagree with the form

> of protest without necessarily being branded as

> racist. No one, no matter what colour they are,

> has absolute say on how to deal with these issues.

This is a laudable sentiment with which I agree in principle (and mostly in practice) but unfortunately falls down as soon as it leaves the house and enters the real world *with regards to the taking the knee issue* (please note emphasis, post edited to make this part clear).

I would fully agree that there are groups of people who throw accusations of racism around far too easily, but I don?t believe it?s as wide spread as GMB news et al would have us think. I *do believe* that there?s still a lot more racism around than many people want to admit, and I think smearing extremely well paid footballers who are clearly not political commissars with accusations of Marxism is an easy, cheap and lazy way to rile up a front in the culture war that seems to be so prevalent.

I genuinely don?t understand why people have a problem with an anti-racist gesture. There?s no good reason for opposing it.

As much as you may hope that the people who boo footballers for taking the knee are doing it for well thought out reasons, I suspect we (once again) fundamentally disagree.

I suppose this comes down to our views of modern UK. I simply don?t think it?s as progressive as you believe. As people are no doubt tired of me saying, the idea that because we?re not openly abusing non-whites in the street as much as we used to doesn?t mean racism has gone away. I?m not sure what people find so hard to understand about that.